Marney Cox, San Diego Association of Governments

It is too early to tell whether this ruling, giving individuals the power to force internet search companies like Google not to find links about them, will seriously curtail internet innovation. Although clearly an unexpected setback for companies, the court indicated a need to balance the public’s right to know with individual privacy rights. In the U.S., different from Europe, the issue is being framed as an attack on the First Amendment (free speech). In the past U.S. courts have not been willing to erode the foundations of free speech. For that reason, what happens in Europe may stay in Europe.

Yes
18% (4)

No
82% (18)

Phil Blair, Manpower

I think it will in fact make the public more comfortable getting and being involved with the internet. They now can feel they have some control over what is said about them and they can “manage” any damaging or incorrect information that now might be available during an internet search. If there is negative, or very positive information out there the searcher will now have to go to the source themselves without being led there by a link. This does put Google and like companies in the awkward position of coming up with policies regarding what they will take down and what they will not, and who will be making those decisions.

Kelly Cunningham, National University System

The ruling is an ultimately futile attempt to control the spread of information. But when does that stop ambitions of statist, centrally controlling planners? Google is just a tool to easily access public information elsewhere available. The ruling will not likely stop innovation using 20th (even 19th) century ideas of sovereignty and “privacy” to control technology that is global, ubiquitous, and expanding at far faster rates than regulators can contemplate. It will be a logistical nightmare and highly doubtful effectively enforceable. One result may be legal filing fees for solicitors in London and Brussels playing “whack-a-mole” at $500+ an hour.

Gina Champion-Cain, American International Investments

Allowing individuals the right to delete links about themselves from a search engine has nothing to do with curtailing innovation. Simply because a Google web link is deleted from its rankings does not delete the content of that link. So if an individual requested that Google remove a link to a blog post containing embarrassing photographs, that site will still be published, but Googlers would have a more difficult time finding it. This simply boils down to an issue regarding an individual's right to privacy versus the public's right to know. However, both sides appear to get a win-win out of this ruling.

Alan Gin, University of San Diego

No. It could have other negative effects, such as reducing the free flow of information and allowing people to present a sanitized version of themselves online. But the latter may not be totally bad, as it allows some measure of privacy and prevents a minor past indiscretion from following someone decades into the future. But I can’t see how this would have any impact on innovation on the Internet. There could still be an open exchange of ideas and the information that leads to innovation would not likely be the information that would be deleted or “forgotten” under this ruling.